WADA: Armstrong investigation to drop "bomb" shortly.

[Berzin]

There are two, Prentice Stephen and a Chiropractor who calls himself a doctor Jeff Spencer.

Jeff Spencer was the guy caught dumping bags of PED's and Syringes in France in 2000. He was with the team for years. After Armstrong retired he sued Jeff and eventually settled.

This really sounds strange. I've never heard of either guy before this post.

What did Armstrong sue Jeff Spencer over, and what was the settlement? Spencer had to pay Lance damages? For what?

After he heard that Landis was spilling the beans one of the first persons he reached out to was Jeff. Just had to see how his old friend was doing. Rumor has it Jeff testified in front of the GJ a couple weeks ago.

Armstrong got in contact with Jeff after he successfully sued him in court? That indeed sounds strange. If this is the cat who indeed was seen dumping medical waste during the 2000 Tour, I'm sure he's got some good stuff to tell the old grand jury.

 

[eleven]

Ok - who then?

Michael Ball and several of his associates.

 

[eleven]

Do you really believe that Landis is the only one to talk? Really?

No.

That doesn't mean that Armstrong is going to be convicted.

 

[Oldman]

No.

That doesn't mean that Armstrong is going to be convicted.

I agree. That hardly means he will be found innocent, either. He will plea out to save his sorry, over-hyped life unless he is stupid enough to get caught in a lie. It will be interesting how his legacy survives whether he does cop a plea or is heard repeatedly to say "I wish to invoke my rights under the fifth amendment".

 

[Anonymous]

This really sounds strange. I've never heard of either guy before this post.

What did Armstrong sue Jeff Spencer over, and what was the settlement? Spencer had to pay Lance damages? For what?



Armstrong got in contact with Jeff after he successfully sued him in court? That indeed sounds strange. If this is the cat who indeed was seen dumping medical waste during the 2000 Tour, I'm sure he's got some good stuff to tell the old grand jury.

Spencer was a physio from the motocross world. He used to work with guys like Johnny O'mara and Rick Johnson among many others. How he ended up part of the blue train is unknown to me.

He's the lackey who dumped the hardware and Actovegin found by some French investigative journo.

 

[scribe]

This really sounds strange. I've never heard of either guy before this post.

What did Armstrong sue Jeff Spencer over, and what was the settlement? Spencer had to pay Lance damages? For what?



Armstrong got in contact with Jeff after he successfully sued him in court? That indeed sounds strange. If this is the cat who indeed was seen dumping medical waste during the 2000 Tour, I'm sure he's got some good stuff to tell the old grand jury.

A settlement is not winning. It is just lays the actions to rest. Probably along the lines of an agreement to sign a paper that pledges to not talk about certain things, or retraction of other statements. Not necessarily monetary amounts.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Michael Ball and several of his associates.

While I agree Ball is in trouble.

It does not explain why Stephanie McIlvain was questioned for 7 hours.

 

[eleven]

I agree. That hardly means he will be found innocent, either. He will plea out to save his sorry, over-hyped life unless he is stupid enough to get caught in a lie. It will be interesting how his legacy survives whether he does cop a plea or is heard repeatedly to say "I wish to invoke my rights under the fifth amendment".

I'll be very surprised if he is required to plea out. What would someone in his position plea out of?

 

[eleven]

While I agree Ball is in trouble.

It does not explain why Stephanie McIlvain was questioned for 7 hours.

Oh, I have no doubt why McIlvain was questioned for 7 hours. But that doesn't mean the result of that 7 hours will be a conviction. They have boatloads of physical evidence against Ball, and they continue raiding related houses etc...

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Oh, I have no doubt why McIlvain was questioned for 7 hours. But that doesn't mean the result of that 7 hours will be a conviction. They have boatloads of physical evidence against Ball, and they continue raiding related houses etc...

Well - you agree that because Mcilvain was questioned it shows Armstrong is a target of the investigation.
Then add to that the testimony being gathered from others and the request for documents from Nike & Trek (that we know about).
Thats 'boatloads' of evidence too.

The only question is how much is in Lances name.
Strange that one of his very few public comments since May was to deny he had a stake in Tailwind - which contradicts what he admitted under oath at the SCA case.

Follow the money.

 

[stephens]

I agree. That hardly means he will be found innocent, either. He will plea out to save his sorry, over-hyped life unless he is stupid enough to get caught in a lie. It will be interesting how his legacy survives whether he does cop a plea or is heard repeatedly to say "I wish to invoke my rights under the fifth amendment".

Now that Novitsky's strategy is well known (that perjury charges are his bread and butter and usually the only thing he gets), I wouldn't be so sure that Armstrong will ever testify. He's got to have good lawyers who will help him avoid that and force Novitsky to actually prove a crime has been committed.

 

[Race Radio]

This really sounds strange. I've never heard of either guy before this post.

What did Armstrong sue Jeff Spencer over, and what was the settlement? Spencer had to pay Lance damages? For what?



Armstrong got in contact with Jeff after he successfully sued him in court? That indeed sounds strange. If this is the cat who indeed was seen dumping medical waste during the 2000 Tour, I'm sure he's got some good stuff to tell the old grand jury.

Jeff was using Armstrong's likeness to sell some goofy Voodoo electro therapy machine. Armstrong sued him and they settled out of court.

 

[Race Radio]

No.

That doesn't mean that Armstrong is going to be convicted.

As I have said before, I do not believe he will either. Lance is all hat and no cattle. He will settle.

 

[flicker]

fyi, lance wins 2010 tour. everyone ahead of him tests positive.

 

[Race Radio]

Now that Novitsky's strategy is well known (that perjury charges are his bread and butter and usually the only thing he gets), I wouldn't be so sure that Armstrong will ever testify. He's got to have good lawyers who will help him avoid that and force Novitsky to actually prove a crime has been committed.

Ignoring a Grand Jury Subpoena would be poor advice.

Greg Anderson did that in the Barry Bonds case. He spent 18 months in prison for contempt of court.

 

[stephens]

Though Greg Anderson's loyalty and contempt for Novitsky is impressive in its boldness, he is a nobody. No judge is going to treat a public figure like Lance Armstrong in jail for a contempt charge and if he did, Armstrong could probably call in a favor that has him out the same day.

 

[Race Radio]

Though Greg Anderson's loyalty and contempt for Novitsky is impressive in its boldness, he is a nobody. No judge is going to treat a public figure like Lance Armstrong in jail for a contempt charge and if he did, Armstrong could probably call in a favor that has him out the same day.

Or course Greg Anderson, the ultimate groupie, would be hero to the groupies.

While you may think Armstrong is above the law others will not. Ignoring Subpoenas did not work for Al Capone, it will not work for Wonderboy.

 

[stephens]

Anderson's case is interesting. I wonder how much the pattern will repeat. For example, I think Anderson originally faced like 50 charges and in the end pled to just two, conspiracy to distribute steroids and a money laundering charge, got three months and some house arrest. his deal also, in his view, made him exempt from having to testify against others. but he was subpoenaed against bonds anyway and refused to do so.

If all Novitsky could get Anderson for was three months, in what should have been a much easier case to investigate and prove, then what is he going to be able to get against cyclists and coaches and the like? Hmm...

 

[Race Radio]

Anderson's case is interesting. I wonder how much the pattern will repeat. For example, I think Anderson originally faced like 50 charges and in the end pled to just two, conspiracy to distribute steroids and a money laundering charge, got three months and some house arrest. his deal also, in his view, made him exempt from having to testify against others. but he was subpoenaed against bonds anyway and refused to do so.

If all Novitsky could get Anderson for was three months, in what should have been a much easier case to investigate and prove, then what is he going to be able to get against cyclists and coaches and the like? Hmm...

You conveniently forget (Ignore) the 18 months he spent in Prison for contempt.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Anderson's case is interesting. I wonder how much the pattern will repeat. For example, I think Anderson originally faced like 50 charges and in the end pled to just two, conspiracy to distribute steroids and a money laundering charge, got three months and some house arrest. his deal also, in his view, made him exempt from having to testify against others. but he was subpoenaed against bonds anyway and refused to do so.

If all Novitsky could get Anderson for was three months, in what should have been a much easier case to investigate and prove, then what is he going to be able to get against cyclists and coaches and the like? Hmm...

How would Lances legacy look it he had to serve 3 days in jail - let alone 3 months?

I don't think the BALCO was an easy case - this should be more straight forward. More people are talking and this time it is a FDA investigation -
but Novitzkys time with the IRS will be helpful too

 

[stephens]

Well, yeah, but that was by his own (stupid) choice. If Anderson had testified, and let's say he says that Bonds knew what was in the cream and the clear (Bonds says he never "knowingly" took steroids), then what's the most time that Bonds get? It'd have to be less than the guy who was the kingpin distributor! So Bonds gets some house arrest and probation like Tammy Tomas?

So we spend millions of dollars to chase crimes that in the end are only worth of less punishment than a bike theft?

 

[Oldman]

Anderson's case is interesting. I wonder how much the pattern will repeat. For example, I think Anderson originally faced like 50 charges and in the end pled to just two, conspiracy to distribute steroids and a money laundering charge, got three months and some house arrest. his deal also, in his view, made him exempt from having to testify against others. but he was subpoenaed against bonds anyway and refused to do so.

If all Novitsky could get Anderson for was three months, in what should have been a much easier case to investigate and prove, then what is he going to be able to get against cyclists and coaches and the like? Hmm...

A relatively small drug development and distribution network was shut down with Balco and Anderson was a low life trainer. They only went after atheletes to drive the point home, get deeper information and hopefully emphasize the penalties for who comes next. Novitsky is now dealing with small time atheletes in a bigger, more international network. Lance and his friends come next.

 

[Polish]

How would Lances legacy look it he had to serve 3 days in jail - let alone 3 months?

I don't think the BALCO was an easy case - this should be more straight forward. More people are talking and this time it is a FDA investigation -
but Novitzkys time with the IRS will be helpful too

If Lance need to spends 3 days in jail - or 3 months - I see candlelight vigils of support outside the Federal Penitentiary. Yellow signs. Maybe a fanboy hunger strike or two. Should get good media coverage.

Different topic...."Barry Bonds' Six Lessons For Lance Armstrong"

Lesson #1: It's Not About Real Crimes.
Lesson #2: There Are No Rules In This Game.
Lesson #3: Your Teammates Will Talk
Lesson #4: Humiliation is The Goal.
Lesson # 5: This Can Take Years.
Lesson #6: Jurors Hate Liars

"Beyond the rules of sport there are the larger principles of fairness and justice under American law. How the testimony of these and other witnesses ultimately play out in the Bonds trial and Armstrong investigation remains to be seen. Everybody shades the truth.

But there's nothing a juror hates more than a government witness who lies.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-littman/barry-bonds-six-lessons-f_b_766853.html

I will be something to watch the Defense Lawyers grill the Government witnesses ouch.

 

[SpartacusRox]

I would almost never recommend to anyone that they read anything in the True Crime genre, because it's awful stuff.

For you, however, I would strongly urge you to read ANYHTHING on Investigating procedure, and evidence gathering.

Clearly, you don't have the faintest idea of what evidence actually is.

There is enough evidence in the Armstrong matter, that were this a murder investigation, this amount of evidence could put 10 different killers on death row.

Most murder convictions rely on almost entirely circumstantial evidence. If an investigator gets any direct evidence, the case is wrapped up fairly quickly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstantial_evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Direct_evidence

The grand jury is in the process of getting a lot of direct evidence.

The only task remaining in the Armstrong investigation is the assembly of the direct evidence into a cohesive narrative with the mountain of circumstantial evidence, and the exposure of bigger fish than Armstrong.

Actually I am betting that I have more knowledge of the court process than you ever will. You seem to have gleaned most of your knowledge from Boston Legal.

A lot of direct evidence? You have no idea of what evidence they have or don't have or whether it supports or is against Armstrong. You also have no idea as to the degree of corroboration between eye witnesses ( which is what I assume you mean by direct evidence). Surely you must also realise that a GJ process is hugely (totally) biased in favour of the prosecution and that it is merely a vehicle used to establish a primae facie case. It takes no account of any defence evidence so if you cannot get a case through a GJ process you really have no case at all.


At the end of the day time will show who is right and who is wrong. I don't have an emotional attachment to this unlike you and others seem to. I just find the anti Armstrong hysteria amusing.

 

[SpartacusRox]

While I agree Ball is in trouble.

It does not explain why Stephanie McIlvain was questioned for 7 hours.

I can explain it. Given the relatively narrow focus of her evidence, to interview her for seven hours smacks of desperation from the prosecution. Why on earth would you interview her for seven hours unless you were asking the same question in twenty different ways. she is hardly Ollie North.

wonder if they shone lights in her eyes too or waterboarded her till she told the "real truth".